January 21, 2013

You are here: Home / Archives for Health / Vaccines and Medicine

Global Health Organization To Purchase Millions Of Toxic HPV Vaccines To Administer To Women And Girls In Third-World Countries

November 30, 2011 By Leave a Comment

At its recent board meeting in Bangladesh, the GAVI Alliance, formerly known as the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, announced plans to bring the deadly human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines Gardasil (Merck & Co.) and Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) into the third world. A pro-vaccination group backed by the World Bank, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the vaccine industry, GAVI’s stated goal is to vaccinate 240 million children by 2015.

As many as two million women and girls in nine unidentified developing countries could soon receive one of the two HPV vaccines, even though HPV is potentially linked to only one percent, of all cervical cancers, according to some reports (https://washingtonexaminer.com/node/…). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), however, has stated that “HPV is not associated with cervical cancer” at all (https://www.naturalnews.com/022404.html).

And yet the vaccine industry through its various “nonprofit” and government partnership continues to push the deadly vaccine on young girls, women, and now even young boys around the world, despite the fact that it does not work and can cause horrific side effects. According to the latest figures released by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Gardasil alone has caused more than 20,000 adverse events and 71 known deaths since it was first unveiled (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/va…).

These figures are actually higher when taking into account the 26 additional deaths concealed in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) documents that were recently exposed by Judicial Watch, a public watchdog group. SaneVax, a vaccine group that tracks HPV vaccine cases, says there have actually been more than 23,300 adverse events and 103 deaths caused by HPV vaccines, to date (https://sanevax.org/).

With all this in mind, it is concerning, to say the least, that GAVI is advocating that the poorest women and children in the world be subjected to this chemical poison. Nevertheless, the group is reportedly working on a deal with both Merck and GSK to get the vaccines at a reduced rate, and the UN World Bank will be issuing bonds to countries in order to fund the whole HPV vaccine campaign.

A GAVI press release also states that the group will push rubella vaccines along with the HPV vaccines. The goal is to vaccinate 588 million children against rubella by 2015.

Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/034269_global_health_HPV_vaccines.html#ixzz1fBix0mv1

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Corporations, Drugs, Health, Propaganda, Rights, Safety, USA, Vaccines and Medicine, Women Tagged With: ,

China’s Vaccine Makers Gear Up for Overseas Markets; Product Safety Image Still a Concern

November 29, 2011 By Leave a Comment

By Melissa Chan on November 29, 2011

China’s vaccine companies are aiming to export lower cost immunizations, which would create new competition for western pharmaceutical companies in providing to poorer countries. There is still speculation about the safety of Chinese products because of the food and drug safety record in recent years. The Associated Press reports:

China’s vaccine-making prowess captured world attention in 2009 when one of its companies developed the first effective vaccine against — in just 87 days — as the new virus swept the globe. In the past, new vaccine developments had usually been won by the U.S. and Europe.

But more needs to be done to build confidence in Chinese vaccines overseas, said Helen Yang of Sinovac, the NASDAQ-listed Chinese biotech firm that rapidly developed the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. “We think the main obstacle is that we have the name of ‘made in China’ still. That is an issue.”

China’s food and record in recent years hardly inspires confidence: in 2007, Chinese cough syrup killed 93 people in Central America; one year later, contaminated blood thinner led to dozens of deaths in the United States while tainted milk powder poisoned hundreds of thousands of Chinese babies and killed six.

The government has since imposed more regulations, stricter inspections and heavier punishments for violators. Perhaps because of that, regulators routinely crack down on counterfeit and substandard drugmaking.

Source:

https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2011/11/china’s-vaccine-makers-gear-up-for-overseas-markets-product-safety-image-still-a-concern

Filed Under: China, Health, Vaccines and Medicine

How war has driven medical advances

November 18, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Many key developments in healthcare have their origins in the battlefield where the treatment of injured troops has led to innovations throughout history which continue today.

The hospital at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan is at the forefront in developments in trauma surgery. Last year it handled 8,000 casualties, many of them with extremely serious injuries.

Incredibly, US and British army medics now expect to save 90% of those patients, the highest figure in the history of warfare.

“Start Quote

Without a doubt people have gone back alive who five years ago would not have survived ”

Lt Col Steve LordConsultant, Camp Bastion Emergency Department

Yet 500 years ago, the best a fallen soldier could hope for was to be dragged off the battlefield by his friends and, if he survived long enough, have his wounds cauterised with hot irons or sealed with boiling oil.

Horrors of war

Blood loss has always been the biggest killer in war. A big turning point came, in 1537, when a French barber called Ambroise Pare was sent as a surgeon to the Siege of Turin.

He was so horrified by what he saw, that he came up with an incredibly simple alternative, the ligature. He would identify bleeding arteries, clamp them, and then tie the ends with silk threads.

Ligatures were used by the Romans and the Arabs, but the skills had been lost and it took time for Pare’s work to change people’s attitudes. A century later surgeons were still using boiling oil and cauterising wounds.

The idea of using specialised transport to evacuate the wounded from the battlefield came 200 years ago and again it was a Frenchman who first saw the need.

Dominique Jean Larrey, surgeon-in-chief to Napoleon’s armies, noticed that the French artillery were able to move cannon at high speed around the battlefield with horse-drawn carriages.

He wondered if similar vehicles could be used to move casualties. At the time many soldiers were left to die where they fell. It could take 24 hours or more to get a wounded man to a field hospital.

“When a limb is carried away by a ball, by the burst of a grenade, or a bomb, the most prompt amputation is necessary,” Larrey wrote in his memoirs.

“The least delay endangers the life of the wounded…. without the assistance of the flying ambulance…a great number would have died from this cause alone.”

Larrey created what he called, “flying ambulances”. These were horse-drawn carts which could carry the wounded in some comfort and at high speed to the waiting surgeons. The Duke of Wellington was so impressed he ordered his men not to fire at them.

Air ambulance

In Afghanistan, modern equipment has allowed Larrey’s approach to be taken to a new level with troops evacuated by a helicopter carrying a doctor, nurse and two paramedics, as well as the sort of equipment you would normally find in a hospital emergency unit.

But the treatment starts while the air ambulance is still scrambling into action.

American and British troops are now all equipped with tourniquets, so if a colleague loses an arm or leg they can apply pressure to stop the bleeding, long enough to get them onto the helicopters and heading for hospital.

En route they are given blood, often a lot of it. Army medics working in Iraq discovered that if troops were given extra plasma, which contains agents that help blood clot, this almost doubled survival rates.

On arrival at Camp Bastion, casualties are scanned for signs of internal bleeding, in which case surgery can be under way in minutes with teams of doctors working on a single patient.

“Without a doubt people have gone back alive who 5 years ago would not have survived,” said Lieutenant Colonel Steve Lord, a consultant in the Emergency Department at Camp Bastion.

War and Medicine

  • The use of a tourniquet to limit blood loss was known in Roman times and may well have been developed in the Roman army where its uses included in amputation.
  • Modern infection control borrows much from the work of Florence Nightingale during the Crimean War in the mid 19th century. She ensured hospital wards were cleaned and ventilated leading to a dramatic drop in mortality rates.
  • In World War I, French doctors first formalised the system of triage to treat mass casualties. Patients were split into three categories to allow prioritisation. Those who were most likely to benefit from treatment were selected ahead of those likely to live and those likely to die regardless.
  • Fleming’s discovery of penicillin in 1928 was initially over-looked and was only made into an effective drug in World War Two, when medical researchers were seeking a method of infection control in troops.

Anyone with a suspected internal injury gets a full body scan he explained. “That is something we should consider more of in the NHS.”

The new blood protocol, with increased plasma for trauma patients is already being introduced in parts of the NHS.

And the military tourniquets, which can be applied with one hand, are also being used by increasing numbers of ambulance services. Another technique developed by the military, hand in hand with civilian medics is the use of portable ultrasound.

This is used not only for scans but also for pain control by allowing surgeons to locate and anaesthetise individual nerves.

Ultrasound was itself a product of war, first used by tank engineers in World War Two to detect cracks in armour.

Today it has become a fantastic medical tool, used for everything from scanning pregnant women to looking for cancers.

 

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15771688

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Corporations, Drugs, Health, Military Industrial Complex, Money, Politicians, Politics, Science, Vaccines and Medicine, War

Depression in Women doubles since 1970s

November 18, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Women have taken on more responsibilities and challenges over the years, such as handling a family and working simultaneously. Along with these responsibilities came feelings of depression and unhappiness, researchers say.

While women used to be the happy ones, the tables have turned, with women being the unhappy gender in today’s world. Women reported being much happier and less stressed decades ago compared to recent years. Since the 1970′s, depressive episodes have doubled, with further increasing up until the 1990′s. Since then, the amount of depression women face has stagnated, with it leveling off in recent years.

A Daily Mail Online reporter writes the following:

Researchers who have studied the extent of mental health problems across Europe say rates of depression in women have doubled since the 1970s.

They found that women are most at risk from the age of 16 to 42, when they tend to have children.

These age groups have between 10 and 13.4 per cent chance of developing depression – twice as high as men in the same age bracket.

Professor Hans-Ulrich Wittchen, who led the study, said: ‘In depression you see this 2.6 times higher rate amongst females.

‘There are clusters in the reproductive years between the ages of 16 to 42.

‘In females you see these incredibly high rates of depressive episodes at the time when they are having babies, where they raise children, where they have to cope with the double responsibilities of having a job and a family.

‘This is what is causing the tremendous burden.

‘It’s the effect on the females who can’t care any more for their family and are trying to be active in their profession, which is one of these major drivers of these higher rates.

‘We have seen compared to the 1970s a doubling of depressive episodes amongst females.

‘It happened in the 1980s and 1990s, there are no further increases now.

‘It’s now levelling off, it’s pretty much stabilised but it’s much much higher than the 1970s.’

The German researchers looked at the extent of mental health problems including dementia, eating disorders and even insomnia across the continent using previous studies and surveys.

Their work, which is published in the journal European Neuropsychopharmacology, found that 38 per cent of people are suffering from some form of mental illness. The most common of these are depression, insomnia, phobias and dementia in old age.

Just last month American researchers found that ‘supermums’ – women who try to juggle careers and families – are far more likely to be depressed.

Their study of 1,600 young women was carried out at the University of Washington.

It concluded that the women who try to do it all are more likely to feel like failures.

But other experts said men are just as likely to suffer from depression.

The difference is that men tend not to admit it so they are often never diagnosed, researchers say.

Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of the mental health charity SANE, said: ‘The reason we believe that depression is twice as common amongst women than men is that women are more prepared to talk about it.

‘Men can find it more difficult to describe their feelings of anxiety, depression or loneliness and may lack the language to express their inner feelings.’

 

Source: https://naturalsociety.com/depression-in-women-doubles-since-1970s/

Filed Under: Capitalism, Consumerism, Corporations, Corruption, Drugs, Economy, Employment, Family, Health, Income Inequality, Mental Health, Money, Neuroscience, Poverty, Psychology, Rights, Science, Vaccines and Medicine

Addiction Discriminates? What That Means in Today’s Troubled Economy

November 15, 2011 By 1 Comment

With America facing the greatest income gap since the Great Depression, the largely unpublicized link between financial inequality and drug addiction suggests big trouble ahead.

For decades now, we’ve branded addiction “an equal opportunity disease.” And judging from the largely white, middle-class people who populate most AA meetings and rehabs, it is.

But while no sector of society is immune from substance abuse, addiction does discriminate. Examples abound: “drug problems” among college grads is nearly a third lower than those for high school dropouts, according to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse and Health. Unemployed people are twice as likely to be addicts as people with jobs. With America facing the greatest income gap since the Great Depression, the largely unpublicized link between financial inequality and drug addiction suggests big trouble ahead.

Of course, the causal connection between poverty and substance use runs both ways. People who are suffering from alcohol or drug problems are obviously more likely to drop out of school or lose their jobs, while those who don’t have the education and skills to find a job in this fast-changing, increasingly high-tech economy not only increase face increased odds of addiction but also dramatically lower odds of recovery.

Stigma keeps addiction low on the list of “causes”; if, for purposes of raising funds and sympathy, the public face of recovery looks most like the people who have the resources to donate—with a celebrity or two thrown in—what’s the beef?

For example, Americans earning less than $20,000 a year are half as likely to successfully quit smoking—and nearly one third less likely to end a cocaine addiction—than those making $70,000 a year or more.

The recovery community has typically shied away from acknowledging these inconvenient truths. For one thing, addiction is so painful and destructive—and sobriety so difficult and one-day-at-a-time—that distinctions based on class or race can seem churlish. For another, stigma keeps addiction low on the list of “causes”; if, for purposes of raising funds and sympathy, the public face of recovery looks most like the people who have the resources to donate—with a celebrity or two thrown in—what’s the beef? Still, among ourselves, we need to admit the truth: addiction is disproportionately concentrated among the poor, and, consequently, among blacks and Hispanics.

Social problems plaguing the poor are largely ignored as intractable, a given of the invisible “underclass.” But as more and more Americans in the middle class become poorer, if not impoverished, by our ongoing economic crises—the implosion of the financial industry (goodbye IRAs and retirement funds), the raft of foreclosures and 10% unemployment (farewell to the bedrock American belief in a house and a job)—denying the link between income and addiction keeps us from finding workable solutions for the explosion in addictive behavior all around us. The most potent anti-craving medications in the world won’t prevent relapse among people who lack skills, job opportunities and hope.

It’s important to emphasize that drawing attention to the increased vulnerability to addiction that poverty poses is in no way meant to pit addict against addict or to sew discord. There are all too many middle-class and rich people in this country battling various addictions. But if we continue to ignore the special role that the lack of education and employment play in fermenting the growing drug problem, we are likely to leave them out of the solution when it comes to crafting treatment and prevention.

Instead, we need to address the specific social and economic problems that have made the US one of the most drugged-out countries in the world. The magic-wand policy answer would be, of course, to cut economic inequality. Almost without exception, nations, and even US states, where the concentration of wealth is greatest have not only more addictions but also more obesity, heart disease, stroke, mental illness and other major health problems than those with less inequality. The greater the inequality, the higher the murder rate, too.

These differences relate not to overall amount of wealth in industrialized countries but to how the money is distributed among the population. So why does inequality per se have such a profound impact on health, including addiction?

Like other primates, humans are hierarchical creatures: there are alphas and betas and so on down the line for both males and females. However, humans also have an innate desire for fairness. The reason children are so quick to say, “That’s not fair,” when their siblings get what seems to be a bigger piece of cake is not because parents teach them to measure their portions but because our brains predispose us to prefer at least some degree of equality—or at the very least rational explanation of unfair distributions.

Numerous studies demonstrate this preference. A major study conducted by the noted Duke University economist and author Dan Ariely found that Americans would favor a system of wealth distribution closer to the one found in Sweden (one of the world’s most egalitarian countries) than the current status quo in the United States. The 5,522 participants surveyed tended to believe that our existing wealth distribution was much closer to equitable than it is—before the crash made us much more aware of the reality.

Study after study has also found that people will pay to punish others who treat them unfairly, even when it isn’t in their own economic interest to do so. While people obviously often selfishly seek their own individual advantages, the idea that we prefer a Darwinian “dog eat dog” world over one in which people have a fair chance at winning through hard work is simply not supported by the data. We’re hierarchical, but we also crave justice.

This is probably related to the fact that we evolved in tight-knit, highly egalitarian groups in which selfishness was highly discouraged because survival required cooperation. Whatever the case, even in the most egalitarian societies, there is a survival difference between those on top and those on the bottom. But that difference is greatly magnified when economic inequality is high. A stress abuse of mortality among all human beings is stress, which is the primary factor in a long list of fatal illnesses. By and large, wealthier people are more equipped to insulate themselves from the stressors of daily life. But people in poverty suffer through a much the greater degree of uncertainty and insecurity, both of which exacerbate chronic stress. Even at the top of the financial pyramid, however, competition, responsibility, and fear of failure take a constant toll.

Meanwhile, chronically elevated stress hormone levels increase the risk of virtually every illness you can name: not just addictions, obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, but also infectious diseases, infant mortality and most cancers.

In one famous study of British civil servants, people on the bottom rung of the hierarchy suffered mortality rates three times higher than those on the top at every age—and the difference was graded sequentially from top to bottom. Only about one third of the difference in death rates was accounted for by factors like smoking and obesity—the rest was caused by the stress itself, not self-medication to try to cope with it.

Keep in mind that those on the bottom weren’t unemployed or even poor: they were working class, and because Britain has a national health care system, their worse health was not due to lack of access to medical services. Further, the US is even more unequal than the UK: in America, the ratio of CEO to worker pay is now 185 to one; in Great Britain, that figure is 28 to one (and they’re considered one of the most inequitable countries in Western Europe).

Although direct comparisons between countries on rates of drug problems are hard to make, one 2003 study contrasted rates of active drug dependence (the DSM diagnostic term for “addiction”) among Americans to that of Brits. It found a drug dependence rate of 1.5% in the U.S. and 0.5% in the UK: three times lower.

America, as many of us may remember, used to be far less unequal: in the postwar years from 1948 to 1985, on average, annual American income grew by $21,162. Some 60% of that growth went to the bottom 90% of earners. In contrast, between 1986 and 2008, average yearly take-home grew by a mere $6,894—and 100% went to the top 10%. In fact, on average, the income for 90% of Americans declined.

If we want to fight addiction, these numbers and trends are unsustainable. Reducing inequality isn’t just a boon to the middle class and poor—it could help every level of society by raising educational achievement, cutting health costs, crime, criminal justice expenditures and stress.

Obviously, this would require more taxes on the wealthy and on corporations and greater spending on schools, particularly early childhood care. It would require a commitment to genuine equality of opportunity—not of outcome, but of real options.

Alternatively, we can continue to self-medicate with food, cigarettes, alcohol, heroin, coke, meth, oxy, sex, the Internet—the list of consumer goods employed in a failing attempt to alleviate stress without getting to its root causes keeps growing—and go on fighting an endless, equally failing, war on drugs—and on ourselves.

 

Source: https://www.alternet.org/drugs/152996/_addiction_discriminates_what_that_means_in_today%27s_troubled_economy/?page=entire

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Consumerism, Corporations, Corruption, Drugs, Health, Income Inequality, Law, Money, Police, Politicians, Politics, Poverty, Protests, Psychology, Rights, USA, Vaccines and Medicine

The Pusher and the Popper

November 15, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Drugs have always been an integral part of human recreation, and served as a business opportunity to many others. Pushers in the ’60s and ’70s became famous for turning many people onto new drugs.

There was no charge for a “taste” or sample of their product. These innocent and uninformed people will try the drugs, like the drugs, want more of the drugs, and come back to the pushers hungry for more . . . ultimately, creating addicts that buy their drugs over and over again, without really knowing or caring about what exactly these drugs are doing to their bodies. Why? Because it feels good, it’s an escape, and it helps to ease the “pain”.

Hmmm . . . this cycle sounds familiar to me . . . .

Pushers, and the successful drug trade in general, also got the attention of the government, who noticed their clever marketing ideas. In the early ’70s, as an answer to the growth in popularity and untaxed profits, the U.S. announced the War on Drugs. In other words, they created a conflict and sold a message that street drugs were bad and the cause of crime. With the masses believing this was a “worthy” cause, they willingly paid higher taxes to fund this so called “war”.
In actuality, this action by our government has only increased the public’s access to drugs. This 40-year-old “war” ha a current annual cost to the taxpayer of around $18 billion; this is just to chase and catch the offenders. After spending all those billions our government then spends billions more in the justice and penal system, housing, feeding, and providing medical care to prisoners at an average cost of $40,000 a year. Maybe if we stopped funding this insurmountable war our government could start providing food, shelter, and medical care to needy citizens who obey the law, but have fallen on hard times. When are we going to make a change? It is time to stop supporting the criminals, and let’s start helping those in need!

Instead, we live with a system were little by little people’s rights and privacy have been taken away in the name of patriotism and justice. Whose patriotism and what justice? Innocent lives, our rights, and cash are the collateral damage of this clash. Why, and for what purpose?

If the government creates a “problem” and they convince people to be afraid of that problem, likedrugs for example, they are more willing to give up their rights out of fear. What word conjures fearin the hearts of all humans more than war? War mongering and fear mongering go hand in hand; this was a master stroke by our government to further distract the masses in order to gain more control through F.E.A.R. - False Evidence Appearing Real.

This is exactly what has happened and continues to happen. These controlling forces use the media (which they own and control) to create false evidence; in this case they make it appear that street drugs are bad and addictive. In reality, pharmaceuticals are just as addictive and hazardous to health. Corporations commercialize their lies through crafty salesmen, who are paid very large salaries, to convince the masses to believe their non-sense. Part of the marketing campaign is to create fear toward “those other drugs”. Human nature does the rest; the masses then blame these “bad drug pushers”, who have been conveniently targeted by the media. This helps create further chaos in society, which increases governmental control, essentially granting pharmaceutical corporations a monopoly on drugs.Look, I’m not on the side of the “bad guys” or the cartels; I think getting people hooked on any drug is terrible, but these “good guys” are getting people hooked on drugs too! As if that wasn’t enough, innocent people are used as cannon fodder in the government’s war for power, which is played out on our public streets and in our neighborhoods.

Hiding under the guise of “savior” and “protectors”, the government fools people into giving up even more of their rights to restore “security”. The same controlling forces that caused the chaos in the first place, are now increasing their control and power over the population. Various governmental leaders have convinced the masses, that it is necessary to have your phone calls monitored andnormal to have your car ripped apart and searched with no explanation; it’s just part of the routine, and necessary for your safety.

Get used to it!

As far as the purpose behind the War on Drugs it’s complicated, because there are many levels, and trillions of dollars involved, but the basic levels of operation can be broken down as follows:

Level One: Create a revenue stream and learn the inner workings of the drug trade in order to take out the competition. Create a false war and raise taxes to gain the venture capital to fund their study and corporate take over of the drug trade.

Level Two: Vilify the street/recreational drugs and drug dealers. Confiscate money and drugs that are “dirty”. Clean up the drugs, synthesize them and give them creative new names with F.D.A. approval!

Level Three: The corporate takeover and legalization of their new “prescription” drugs through clever corporate-packaging and marketing campaigns aimed to “help” the masses.

Level Four: Take all the money, knowledge, and influence; use it to spread the franchise for further profit. Their influence is the media, the knowledge is used to create addicts, and the money comes rolling in….

Level Five: Repeat. They’re still learning and expanding!

So here we are. Our leaders learned something from the competitive drug market, declared war on their “enemies”, and now we pay the bill. Their media helps sell a negative image of street drugs. Then, they turn around and open their own drug operation called “pharmaceuticals”, and create addicts out of the same citizens they claim to be protecting. The best and biggest pay-off of all, the government now profits off both sides of the drug trade!

Now, massive corporations have become the drug lords, and doctors are often used as the pushers. Doctors always know what’s best for their patients after all; they’ve been to medical school and are just trying to help people – right? Innocent people walk into doctors’ appointments, explain a few symptoms, and asample is given to them. They go home, uninformed, but trusting in their highly educated doctor, and decide to give it a “taste”. When their body has a negative side effect, or they feel strange, they call their doctor, who responds with, “oh no, that’s normal just pop by the office tomorrow and I’ll adjust your dose and give you some more free samples.” They trust their doctors, wait for their body to adjust to its new chemical addiction, and now they’re hooked. That sounds criminal to me, creating an addict out of innocent people for profit. I’m not judging the millions of people on prescription drugs either – we should all be free to choose. I’m stressing the hypocrisy in the current system that judges and condemns their definition of “criminals” for conducting business under the very same model, selling in many cases the exact same product.

It’s time to stop trying to govern the drug trade and start educating people about all forms of drugs, including herbal alternatives – and the effects all drugs have on our bodies. When we treat all drugs as a choice of the individual and put education first – we’ll have true freedom!

Whatever options we are told to have by people in positions of authority, we can always choose to say ‘no,’ even though the consequences for doing so may seem frightening.

Being alert to our own interests, and having the simple courage to say ‘no’ in accordance with personal judgment, can mean the difference between wanting freedom and actually being free. Remember that the next time your doctor offers you free samples of an easy cure.

Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2011/07/pusher-and-popper.html

Filed Under: Big Pharma, Capitalism, Corporations, Health, Money, Politics, Poverty, Rights, Science, Vaccines and Medicine

Antibiotics Promote Obesity, Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome

November 13, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Antibiotics, recently linked to skyrocketing mental illness rates, are now being identified as a player in the soaring obesity rates around the globe.

Previously, it was revealed that excessive antibiotic usage may also be responsible for spawning drug-resistant superbugs that continue to emerge worldwide.

The reason that antibiotics are potentially making you fat, mentally unhealthy, and suffer from gut problems has to do with the way it affects bacteria within your gut. While antibiotics do kill harmful ‘bad’ bacteria as intended, they also destroy ‘good’ bacteria in the gut which help to regulate more than just gut health. In fact, studies are finding that gut bacteria may be responsible for regulating overall health, including mental health and stability.

In one study regarding the depletion of ‘good’ bacteria in the gut, researchers explained how antibiotics administered to mice ultimately resulted in altered behaviors far beyond diarrhea and pain:

“It may be that those changes in gut bacteria not only contribute to the generation of gut symptoms, like diarrhea or pain, but may also contribute to this altered behavior that we see in those patients,” said researcher Stephen Collins, of the Farncombe Family Digestive Health Research Institute at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.

Experts are now drawing a conclusion between depleted beneficial bacteria and obesity, as more information comes out over the dangers and repercussions of antibiotic use. Dr. Martin Blaser of New York University Langone Medical Center is one such expert, who has been actively studying the effects of antibiotics on gut bacteria.

Dr. Blaser summarized his findings on the subject, revealing how antibiotics actually have a number of long-term side effects that the medial establishment has previously failed to recognize – or at least report:

They’ve changed health and medicine over the last 70 years. But when doctors prescribe antibiotics, it is based on the belief that there are no long-term effects. We’ve seen evidence that suggests antibiotics may permanently change the beneficial bacteria that we’re carrying.

Honing in on the obesity connection, a studyconducted in April 2011 involving Dr. Blaser found that people treated with antibiotics had a 6-fold increase in post-meal ghrelin, a 20 percent increase in leptin levels, and a 5 percent increase in body mass index 18 months after completing the course of antibiotics. Ghrelin, of course, stimulates the brain in such a manner that leads to not only increased appetite, but also particularly leads to the accumulation of fat in abdominal fat tissue. This type of fat is associated with metabolic syndrome and an increased risk of diabetes.

Dr. Blaser explains:

…antibiotics for H. pylori trick the body into eating more by disrupting hunger hormone levels. Indeed, mice given antibiotics get fatter than their untreated counterparts despite having the same diet.

It is very likely that further research will come out exposing a number of other adverse health effects from antibiotic usage, just as with BPA and antipsychotic drugs. Of course, antibiotics are potentially creating the mental illnesses through gut bacteria depletion which the suicide-linked antipsychotics aim to ‘treat’, playing into the pharmaceutical food chain.

Thankfully, a number of powerful natural antibiotics exist that do not come with such harsh side effects. Concerned over the destructive effects of antibiotics, research has concluded that variousamino acids are actually preferable to antibiotics when it comes to treating infection. Other natural options for combating bacteria and infections include:

  • Garlic
  • Echinacea
  • Goldenseal
  • Wild Indigo

 

Source:
Filed Under: Big Pharma, Capitalism, Censorship, Consumerism, Corporations, Education, Health, Human Rights, Media, Money, Occupy, Politics, Population, Poverty, Privacy, Propaganda, Protests, Rights, Science, USA, Vaccines and Medicine

11 Shocking Things You now Realize to be True - But would Not Have Believed 3 Years Ago

November 13, 2011 By Leave a Comment

We are living through a time of Great Awakening.

The people of our world are beginning to open their eyes and realize the stunning depth of the scams and collusion taking place all around them. These scams that steal their wealth, poison them with chemicals, enslave them with financial trickery and control their minds with propaganda. These scams are the very fabric of modern government, the mainstream media, universities and so-called “science” institutions.

Here are 11 of those scams that you probably never would have believed just 2-3 years ago; but nowyou probably realize these are true!

Welcome to the real world, my friends. Now that we recognize the depth of the scams, let’s change things for the better . (Occupy America!)

#1 - Most of the honey you buy in the grocery store contains no actual honey whatsoever

It’s true, the so-called “honey” isn’t even technically honey. Most of it is made of cheap “mystery” sweeteners, illegally imported from China, right under the nose of the FDA.

#2 - The fluoride that’s dripped into municipal water supplies is actually a highly toxic industrial chemical byproduct

This scam is exploding in the faces of all the ignorant dentists and doctors who have been pushing this poison for years. Once again, they were wrong; the “conspiracy theorists” were right.

#3 - Flu vaccines often contain live flu viruses and actuallycausethe flu as a way to worsen the flu season and scare more people into buying vaccines

It’s also true with MMR vaccines, which cause the measles. Flu vaccines are the greatest medical hoax that has ever been perpetrated on the world:

#4 - Ron Paul is deliberately stripped out of mainstream news reports, online polls and debate coverage in order to “game the system” against him

The power elite don’t really want “fair and open” elections in America, you see. It’s all about rigging the system to make sure a globalist puppet gets elected instead of a Man of the People.

#5 - The United States government openly trafficks illegal guns into Mexico as a way to cause gun violence in the USA

It all seemed so very clever until they got caught, and now it just seems flatly criminal. So why can the federal government run illegal guns and nothing happens to them, but if you or I do it, we go to prison for a long, long time?

#6 - Prestigious U.S. hospitals are widely engaged in black market organ trafficking and organ transplants

And why not? It’s profitable, and they can claim they’re “saving lives!” Make no mistake: the organ transplant industry is steeped in dark, psychopathic criminal activity.

#7 - The child sex slave industry is huge, highly profitable, and found everywhere across America (and the world)

You wouldn’t have believed this, probably, until the whole Penn State scandal recently made headline news around the world. As everybody now knows, Penn State sports officials routinely raped young children, even pimping them out to other criminal rapists who paid big money to rape young boys. This went on for 15 years right inside a prestigious university, right here in America.

Are you shocked? You shouldn’t be. Alex Jones has been sounding the alarm about this fora decade. Nobody listened to him. They couldn’t believe it was real. People would rather bury their heads in the sand than face reality.

And yet, this Penn State scandal just scratches the surface. The far deeper horrifying truth of all this is that Child Protective Services routinely kidnaps young American children and sells them into sex slavery — so-called “white slavery.”

That story has not yet been covered by the mainstream media.

#8 - Commercial chickens are routinely fed arsenic, and commercial cows are routinely fed chicken poop

Oh, you didn’t know that? When you eat conventional beef, you’re eating meat from cows who created that meat by consuming chicken poop. Yumm! Can I have some more poop on that burger, please?

#9 - “Natural” foods and cereals are routinely made with genetically modified ingredients

Oh, you thought “natural” meant better than organic? Non-GMO? Stop getting suckered by the cereal companies and dishonest food conglomerates. Know what you’re really eating:

#10 - The global banking industry is a criminal racket that steals wealth from working class People and redistributes it to the global wealthy elite

You wouldn’t have believed this five years ago, but now, looking at your own bank account, the job you lost, the house you can’t sell and the health care you can’t afford, it’s all sinking in: The global financial system is an engineered con that suckers working-class people into giving up all their wealth, piece by piece, until they die bankrupt. Indentured servitude…

#11 - The U.S. government routinely conspires with pharmaceutical giants to conduct criminal, inhumane medical experiments on innocent people

Recent revelations about the U.S. government’s secret medical experiments in Guatemala are just the tip of the iceberg here. Dr. Jona Salk, inventor of the polio vaccine, also ran unethical medical experiments on people. In fact, the entire history of modern medicine (pharmaceuticals, vaccines, chemotherapy and more) is something of a “house of horrors” of inhumane medical experiments on innocent victims.

What else is true?

Ever wonder what else might be true about our world that you never would have believed just a few years ago? Maybe it’s time you started reading books byJim Marrsor evenDavid Icke.

Now is a good time to start listening to the Robert Scott Bell Show on www.NaturalNewsRadio.com where you’ll also hear news from Patrick Timpone.

Perhaps it’s time we all started questioning history, medicine, corporate science, banking institutions and all governments. Discard your blinders.

Maybe it’s time we opened our eyes to reality and stopped lying to ourselves about the depth of corruption and evil in our world. And why would we do that? Because that’s the first step to positive revolution where we work together to createa better world… a world where such criminality and suffering is ancient history.

Accept reality, in other words… and then CHANGE it for the better.

Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/034126_awakening_beliefs.html#ixzz1dY05OCLk

Filed Under: Animal Rights, Banks, Biotechnology, Capitalism, Censorship, Consumerism, Corporations, Economy, Employment, Environment, Food, Health, Human Rights, Income Inequality, Law, Media, Military Industrial Complex, Money, Monsanto, Nuclear, Occupy, Oil, Personal Opinions/Rants, Police, Politics, Population, Poverty, Prison, Privacy, Propaganda, Protests, Psychology, Radiation, Revolution, Rights, Science, Surveillance, USA, Vaccines and Medicine, Whistleblowers

Depopulating on contact ‘to save lives’ a possible giant leap against mankind with nanoparticle vaccine push by Bill Gates

November 11, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Depopulation might take a giant leap if a Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HCI) proposal in “Grand Challenges Explorations” is granted as it will have a million Gates Foundation US dollars to develop a nanoparticle vaccine on contact with human perspiration according to a written statement released Wednesday. Bill Gates, who has stated in a TED presentation that vaccines are a favored method of depopulation, is promoting this project touted as a way to save lives, but raising concerns about negative eugenics and violation of the human right to self-determination including right to informed consent.

“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation might be funding a programme supporting a ‘global health project’ to develop nanoparticles that will release vaccine on contact with human sweat” according to a written statement by the Helmholtz Centre in Braunschweig.

If successful, The Helmhotz Centre, conducting the POLMITRANSVAC (Pollen Mimetic Transcutaneous Vaccination) research programme in co-operation with Helmholtz Institute for Pharmaceutical Research (HIPS), “the Gates Foundation will take the project into its second phase with up to a million US dollars of financing,” it states.

“This is the first time that we at the HCI are linking our expertise in the development of vaccines with the years of experience in devising potentially usable active substances with nanoparticles… possessed by the HIPS scientists in Saarbrücken” say scientists Carlos Alberto Guzmán of the HCI, Claus-Michael Lehr and Steffi Hansen of HIPS and Ulrich Schäfer of University of the Saarland.

“What is novel about our method is the way the vaccine gets into the body. The nanoparticles press through hair follicles into the skin, burst on contact with human sweat and release the vaccines – as with pollen sensitization. This method of vaccination obviates painful injection with a needle and has the potential to trigger an immune response in the mucous membrane.”

The nanoparticle vaccine HCI research project is among 78 projects Gates is promoting in the “Grand Challenges Explorations” Fourth Round of proposals according to the statement.

“The Initiative supports researchers throughout the world seeking to develop strategies for diagnosis and prevention of infectious disease and improving family health. Selection was made from among 2,700 proposals submitted for consideration. The Foundation supports research projects in a total of 18 countries on six continents.

Grand Challenges Explorations

“Grand Challenges Explorations provides continuing support to original and creative ideas that can assist the campaign against health problems,” said Tachi Yamada, President of World Health Programme of the Gates Foundation.

“We are convinced that some of these ideas will lead to new innovations and ultimately to solutions that will save lives.”

Grand Challenges Explorations is a five-year-long initiative with a budget of over 100 million dollars promoting innovation in the field of World Health. It is part of the “Grand Challenges in Global Health” initiative supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation seeking “important innovations in global health care services.”

As Mr. Gates explained in a TED presentation, humans are causing too much CO2; the main way to reduce that is to reduce the population; and vaccines are a favored way to depopulate.

In September 2010, Dupré reported on the Gates and depopulation:

“Although many people rejected the H1N1 swine flu toxic experimental vaccine, some 200 million people, mainly the poor and people of color, have received it according to Reuters. This has been a major win for Eugenics proponents and leaders determining who will live and who to kill.” (Note: This article on the internet has been tampered: The embedded Gates video has been deleted, as have photo and links that had been there.)

When We Are Change members later questioned Mr. Gates about those statements he had made during the TED presentation, after attempting to avoid the human rights defenders, Gates replied, “It’s not an easy topic to talk about.”

Mr. Gates was then reported by Reuters saying vaccine investment offers best returns, the best possible investment in “global health.”

“Gates, who said his top priority was helping to eradicate polio worldwide, also met health ministers from countries including Afghanistan and Pakistan where the virus continues to paralyze unvaccinated children.”

In April 2011, vaccine human rights were upheld in a Belgium court that ruled against mandatory polio vaccination law, an outdated law causing children to get polio instead of preventing it studies show.

 
Source: https://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/depopulation-gates-pushes-nanoparticle-vaccine-giant-leap-against-mankind

Filed Under: Capitalism, Health, Money, Politics, Population, Protests, Rights, Science, Vaccines and Medicine

The Brave New World of Genetically Modifying a ‘New Human Species’

November 11, 2011 By Leave a Comment

If some of the information emerging from the technology, governmental, and academic worlds are any indication, not only is the police state here; the scientific dictatorship is right around the corner. Indeed, if recent comments made by Juan Enriquez are indicative of the coming state merger between technology and genetics, we have much to be concerned about.

For those that are unfamiliar with Enriquez, he may not be the most flashy of the science superstars currently on the scene, but he is not exactly a nobody either. Enriquez was the founding director of the Harvard Business School Life Sciences Project and is currently chairman and CEO of Biotechonomy LLC., a “life sciences research and investment firm” and managing director of Excel Venture Management. He is the author of numerous books, including As The Future Catches You: How Genomics And Other Forces Are Changing Your Life, Work, Health, and Wealth and The Untied States of America: Polarization, Fracturing, and Our Future.

Enriquez also serves on the boards of Cabot Corporation, The Harvard Medical School Genetics Advisory Council, The Chairman’s International Council of the America’s Society, the Visiting Committee of Harvard’s David Rockefeller Center, Tuft University’s EPIIC, and Harvard Business School’s PAPSAC.

Enriquez is a Harvard graduate himself who has previously served as CEO of Mexico City’s Urban Development Corporation, Coordinator General of Economic Policy and Chief of Staff for Mexico’s Secretary of State. Enriquez also boasts of working closely with Craig Venter, who is generally credited with the mapping of the human genome.

Obviously, Enriquez has established quite the résumé in the academic and business worlds. This, combined with his appearances on the very popular TED conference talks, only add to his qualifications in the field of culture creation which is most likely his role. Indeed, much like the other scientific superstars provided to the public by the culture industry, it appears Mr. Enriquez may be more talented in the area of delivering messages than making discoveries. This is why Enriquez’s comments during the interview with Technology Review’s Emily Singer are somewhat disturbing.

The interview was conducted after Enriquez’s speech at a Technology Review conference where he mentioned that, as described by Singer, “Our newfound ability to write the code of life will profoundly change the world as we know it.” According to Enriquez, because we as humans can engineer both our environment and ourselves, humanity is now breaking the “boundaries” of our own natural existence and development which, of course, is described as “Darwinian evolution,” itself a questionable strand of a highly suspect theory to begin with.

Nevertheless, when asked why he thought there is going to be a new human species, Enriquez responded in typical eugenicist fashion. He said,

The new human species is one that begins to engineer the evolution of viruses, plants, animals, and itself. As we do that, Darwin’s rules get significantly bent, and sometimes even broken. By taking direct and deliberate control over our evolution, we are living in a world where we are modifying stuff according to our desires.

He goes on to discuss the manner in which humans are already influencing their own “evolution.” He says:

If you turned off the electricity in the United States, you would see millions of people die quickly, because they wouldn’t have asthma medications, respirators, insulin, a whole host of things we invented to prevent people from dying. Eventually, we get to the point where evolution is guided by what we’re engineering. That’s a big deal. Today’s plastic surgery is going to seem tame compared to what’s coming.

Enriquez’s comments in this regard are a bit puzzling if the reader does not fully understand the position from which he is coming. The fact that millions of people are attached to electronic devices on which their lives depend is not a testament to guided or enhanced evolution at all. If anything, this would indicate a move in the opposite direction.

Keep in mind that Enriquez is a Darwinian Evolutionist, so he is keenly aware of the process by which Darwinian evolution allegedly progresses. For that reason, his comments may seem to be a contradiction of his own belief system to some. However, when one reads the rest of the interview, Enriquez’s statement begins to make more sense.

During the course of the short interview, Enriquez makes reference to how the new technology, as it emerges, will change virtually everything in society as we know it.

And he means everything. Not just industries. Not just economic disparity. Everything.

This includes morality itself. In fact, Enriquez even goes so far as to define this shift in morality as the “new ethics.”

Enriquez saves the best for last, however, when he explains how the “new ethics” will come into play.

He says:

The issue of [genetic variation] is a really uncomfortable question, one that for good reason, we have been avoiding since the 1930s and ’40s. A lot of the research behind the eugenics movement came out of elite universities in the U.S. It was disastrously misapplied. But you do have to ask, if there are fundamental differences in species like dogs and horses and birds, is it true that there are no significant differences in humans? We are going to have an answer to that question very quickly. If we do, we need to think through an ethical, moral framework to think about questions that go way beyond science.

This statement alone echoes the same mentality that was accepted and promoted during the early half of twentieth century to justify mass sterilization, institutionalization, social segregation, eveninfanticide.

Although eugenics is now allegedly abhorred by academia and the mainstream media, the fact is that it still plays as much a role in both science and government policy as it ever did. Only the names have changed.

Instead of “eugenics” and “racial hygiene,” the scientific community now promotes “social biology” and “sociobiology.” “Deficient” genes now replace the term “inferior” genes. “Family planning” now replaces “abortion” and “sterilization.”

As quoted above, Enriquez stated that eugenics were disastrously misapplied in the 1930s and 1940s. Although he does not clarify whether he is referring to the American or the German version (or both), we can reasonably assume that he meant that the program was often race-based, as opposed to being based simply on “inferior genetics” across the board. Or, perhaps he is merely referring to the public relations issues that arose from these systems. At this point, it is difficult to determine.

Regardless, he openly questions whether or not some humans are so different from one another that they may be considered an entirely different species. This, in and of itself, is reminiscent of a language used in eugenics campaigns in both Europe and America years ago.

Considering the fact that Enriquez is in favor of the creation of a “new ethics,” this statement alone, if his philosophy gains any traction, is quite concerning.

In light of the increase in propaganda masquerading as science and being peddled by science superstars like Enriquez, there is no doubt the world’s population is being prepped for a eugenics-based future. This time, of course, the system will be assisted by a much more sophisticated technological machine and, thus, a much more efficient system of eugenics. After years of non-stop television, media repetition, and “experts” who tout the benefits of merging man and machine, as well as the cost of inheriting “inferior” genes, there is also little doubt that the world’s population will march into this future willingly.

Although greatly improved in terms of implementation and public perception, we have seen this system before and, unfortunately, what Juan Enriquez labels a “new ethics” may not be very new at all.

 

Source:

Filed Under: Health, Politics, Rights, USA, Vaccines and Medicine
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »